They deserve that special low tax rate

[rehmwa 2]

kallend

Unfortunately it has become government of the people by the wealthy for the wealthy.

I agree with that also - though I'd say 'powerful/influential' instead of wealthy.

And I'd caviat that your 'wealthy' is not restricted to any party and that neither party has a philosophy to restrict/fix the situation.

Or, if I were to set aside my natural cynicism for a moment - I could say both parties have different philosophies on what is necessary to fix the situation - and both are so incompetent at it that their efforts just result in making it worse, not better.


(sorry, I guess both options are cynical, one just assumes devious intentions up front, the other assumes good intentions combined with incompetence and total lack of understanding of long term cause and effect...... Thus the birth of the two party system?)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[SkyDekker 1,465]

lawrocket

But you know what I meant. Lower everyone's rate to that of a he'd fund manager. Of course, then the progressives will really flip out.

You can't run your country on your current level of income, lowering income doesn't seem like the most logical step to take.

Who has benefited the most during the last 12 years of war? While the children of the poor and the middle class have been out dying and spilling blood so the rich can get richer. Only seems logical that some of those riches can be used to at least pay for the sacrifices made by the rest of society.

[lawrocket 3]

SkyDekker

***But you know what I meant. Lower everyone's rate to that of a he'd fund manager. Of course, then the progressives will really flip out.

You can't run your country on your current level of income, lowering income doesn't seem like the most logical step to take.

Who has benefited the most during the last 12 years of war? While the children of the poor and the middle class have been out dying and spilling blood so the rich can get richer. Only seems logical that some of those riches can be used to at least pay for the sacrifices made by the rest of society.

I disagree. There used to be a time when we were all in this together. Then populism happened and he Devils were the business owners and corporations and robber barons. Then we had a war and we were all in this together. And then things get good and we find out that there are enemies of the U.S. and those enemies are those who earn. The more a person earns the more that person must have done something wrong.

We cannot run the country on the current level of income. True. And this country is losing taxpayers to Canada. The Admin has suggested that it is pretty much treason to decide that the country keeps beating the shit out of them. I remember when people used to come to the US to escape the bad tax treatment. Even hardcore pinkos like John Lennon were capitalists at heart and wanted to keep more of what he earned.

Yes we should cut military spending. And we have no choice but to eventually cut Medicare and Social Security and pensions. And then probably cuts to Obamacare, HHS, etc.

It's an interesting thing that's liberals want to dump trillions of dollars on the basis of climate projections but see budget projections and decide, naw, we'll pass that down the line. At least the GOP is consistent in ignoring all thoughts of the future. Budget? Climate? Fuck it. Let's spend more.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,098]

I guess you're too young to remember the tax rates under Eisenhower and Nixon. According to you, those Republicans considered the wealthy to be enemies.

Which is, of course, complete nonsense.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Even hardcore pinkos like John Lennon were capitalists at heart and wanted to keep more of what he earned.

DOn't get me wrong, I would love to keep much more of what I make too. And I absolutely detest those who take advantage of the system and get money for doing nothing.

However, money is required to keep a country running and make it viable. All this talk about tax reduction and having the lowest possible taxes mean sacrifices have to come from somewhere else.

You always like this one:

Cost, quality, quantity.

So if you want these massive reductions on cost....where are you willing to take the impact? Kill more Americans or lower the quality of living?

[lawrocket 3]

SkyDekker

Quote

Even hardcore pinkos like John Lennon were capitalists at heart and wanted to keep more of what he earned.

DOn't get me wrong, I would love to keep much more of what I make too. And I absolutely detest those who take advantage of the system and get money for doing nothing.

However, money is required to keep a country running and make it viable. All this talk about tax reduction and having the lowest possible taxes mean sacrifices have to come from somewhere else.

You always like this one:

Cost, quality, quantity.

So if you want these massive reductions on cost....where are you willing to take the impact? Kill more Americans or lower the quality of living?

What I suggest doing would probably drive America into a recession. There would be massive layoffs from government jobs. There would be a lot of private layoffs as contracts get completed. Tens of thousands of back office medical staff would be laid off because their jobs would be unnecessary. Accountants and lawyers would be jobless in droves.

It would be a tremendous shock to do it suddenly and quickly. But look at the threat of his bad sequester was supposed to be. And by golly, I turned out to actually seem to help things

I look at it as a nation that is hooked. Consider it like the US giving out cigarettes to anybody that wants them. The choice is to give more cigarettes out, to keep the level the same, to gradually wean off cigarettes or to stop giving them outright. The cold turkey solution is painful but quick.

Yes. I do think it is time to shock the economy into clean living and off the smack. It will hurt. It will cause pain. It will hurt. It will. A lot. But putting in a peak of total revenue of say 20% GDP still leaves a huge government. I'd favor something like 15% to get started. Meaning spending would have to be cut to manage that. Pain will happen. But that pain will be temporary.

I trust that you don't have a problem with junkies detoxing. Short term pain for long term gain.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

I trust that you don't have a problem with junkies detoxing. Short term pain for long term gain.

Just as long as you realize that sudden withdrawal, your Cold Turkey, can be deadly. Rather big gamble to take with a country.

[lawrocket 3]

SkyDekker

Quote

I trust that you don't have a problem with junkies detoxing. Short term pain for long term gain.

Just as long as you realize that sudden withdrawal, your Cold Turkey, can be deadly. Rather big gamble to take with a country.

Absolutely. I stated that it would be a shock. But I can't say that seeing the US resembling Layne Staley in a out 1998 doesn't leave me thinking he'd be better just doing more. Be nice to see some detox before rock bottom.

My wife is hotter than your wife.